N.D. law protects small pharmacies from big-box stores
September 25, 2010 at 1:34 pm in Grand Forks Herald
As national competitors such as Wal-Mart Stores Inc., Target Corp. and Walgreen Co. fight to dominate the pharmacy market, small North Dakota drugstores are largely protected from that struggle. For almost five decades, a unique state law has required that pharmacists own or control most of the state’s pharmacies Continue Reading
I have no problem with most laws that allow small businesses to complete with the Walmarts of the world. I don’t have a major issue paying a few extra dollars for prescriptions. However, my biggest complaint is not being able to fill a prescription from 6:00 pm on a Sunday until Monday morning, or any evening during the week. I would understand this dilemma if I lived in the middle of nowhere. However, this is Grand Forks, a town of 50k+ people. Most towns our size (in other states) have some type of option to fill a prescription 24 hours a day. The day one of our “small” pharmacies is able to fill a prescription 24 hours a day, then I will support the current law. Until then, let Walmart open a pharmacy.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
I think the whole point of this debate is the crony capitalism that exists as law. A group of well-connected pharmacists got together and had a law written to limit their competition. Why didn’t the mom and pop hardware stores get a law passed to keep out Menards? How about the mom and pop grocery stores? Maybe they weren’t wealthy enough at the time to afford a few state senators. I don’t remember seeing a poor small town pharmacist. Unfortunately the day of mom and pop retailers has come and gone for better or worse. I feel their pain in not being able to compete with the big box outfits, but I guess that is why we send out children to college, and that is to get prepared for the next big paradigm shift that will appear over the horizon. Getting rid of this law isn’t about getting drugs cheaper, or the convenience of weekend shopping. Getting rid of this law will eliminate another illegal (in my opinion) anti competition law that limits free market choices.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
I believe this law was originally passed so doctors could not own pharmacies and then write lots of bogus prescriptions to be filled by their pharmacy thus lining their own pockets.
Now this law is being used for other purposes and that is what I really object to.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Consumers want affordable prices, convenience and customer service. Perhaps these smaller pharmacies should have a strategic plan to fight against competition. There are plenty of businesses who don’t operate as the low cost provider. Rather their product offering is centered on customer service or convenience. Wal-Mart is a low cost provider, with low customer service and in my opinion “a hectic place to shopâ€. With that being said, small pharmacies can fight back without the government help.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Good point, XCON, come up with a more creative business plan and go after the niche markets that the big boxers will not or do not serve very well.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Good point Cascade, I was not aware of the origins of the law. If that’s the case, I can see where it may have been a valid argument for accountability, and that there probably still is some compelling arguments that the pharmacists can make for retaining the law. However, I see it as an anti competition law that should at least be debated again in light of the changes that have taken place in the last 30 or 40 years to see if it is still good policy.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
49 states have the benefit at shopping at Walmart. They have a great $10 for 90 if in generic. We North Dakotans will pay more if we choose to fill our prescriptions in state. This is a no brainer for ND consumers. I hope the legislature passes this early in their session!
Like or Dislike:
0 
0